To all and sundry

There's a thread spinning out in IBMTCP-L concerning trying to persuade a 
zIIP to do some work handling TCP 

traffic supposedly exercising the "multiple write" feature of HiperSockets as 
described in the following two 

sections in the z/OS Communications Server (CS) IP Configuration Guide 
manual:

<quote>

1.2.18.17.9 HiperSockets multiple write

The HiperSockets multiple write facility moves multiple output data buffers in 
a 
single write operation. This facility might reduce CPU usage, and might provide 
a performance improvement for large outbound messages that are typically 
generated by traditional streaming workloads such as file transfer, and 
interactive web-based services workloads such as XML or SOAP. 

To enable the HiperSockets multiple write facility on all HiperSockets 
interfaces, including interfaces created for dynamic XCF, add the 
IQDMULTIWRITE parameter to the GLOBALCONFIG statement. For more 
information about the GLOBALCONFIG statement and the HiperSockets multiple 
write facility, see z/OS Communications Server: IP Configuration Reference. 

Restriction: HiperSockets multiple write is effective only on an IBM System z10 
and when z/OS is not running as a guest in a z/VM environment.

</quote>

http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-
bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/F1A1B3A0/1.2.18.17.9

<quote>

1.2.18.17.10 HiperSockets multiple write assist with IBM zIIP


When your system is an IBM System z10 and the HiperSockets multiple write 
facility is enabled, an additional assist for large outbound TCP messages is 
available through the IBM System z10 Integrated Information Processor and 
IBM System z9 Integrated Information Processor (zIIP). To enable 
HiperSockets write processing for large outbound TCP messages on available 
zIIPs, specify the ZIIP IQDIOMULTIWRITE parameter on the GLOBALCONFIG 
statement. 

When your system is an IBM System z10 that does not have zIIPs configured, 
you can use the zIIP HiperSockets multiple write facility to project the 
percentage of existing HiperSockets workload currently running on central 
processors that would be eligible to run on zIIPs, if zIIPs were available on 
the 
z/OS image. ...

</quote>

http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-
bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/F1A1B3A0/1.2.18.17.10

Apparently, if you manage to persuade the zIIP to earn its keep, you will see a 
non-zero percentage alongside the name of the main CS IP address space 
under "IIP" in RMF output similar to the following:

<sample>

.                        RMF V1R11  Processor Usage                  Line 1 of 
94  .
.  Command ===>                                                  Scroll ===> 
CSR   .
.                                                                               
   .
.  Samples: 120     System: CWD2  Date: 05/25/11  Time: 15.35.00  Range: 
120   Sec .
.                                                                               
   .
.              Service    --- Time on CP % ---   ----- EAppl % -----            
   .
.  Jobname  CX Class      Total    AAP    IIP       CP    AAP    IIP            
   .
.                                                                               
   .
.  TCPIP    SO SYSSTC      16.2    0.0    0.0     16.2           0.0            
   .
.  ...

</sample>

After some discussion - including the odd developer - the conclusion seems to 
be that the following are the necessary prerequisites:

- z10
- an available zIIP
- *not* a VM guest
- using the TCP transport layer logic
- socket send call size >= 32K
- GLOBALCONFIG IQDMULTIWRITE
- GLOBALCONFIG ZIIP IQDIOMULTIWRITE

So my request to the list participants is to ask whether anyone has 
succeeded, in effect, in making that percentage use of the zIIP other than 0 
and if so how. In particular, is that list of prerequisites correct and 
complete?

In the case of successful use of the zIIP, what was the application involved. 
If Connect:Direct - using TCP and IP of course[1] - what were the parameters 
of the application which needed attention? If other, perhaps the same 
question applies so that others using that application might benefit eventually 
(in both the English and non-English meanings).

-

[1] It appears that output from commands to Connect:Direct even when using 
TCP and IP, contain the tokens "VTAM", "RUs" and "Rusize" which is (a) very 
lazy of the Connect:Direct developers and (b) guaranteed to cause confusion!

No, the problem is not that an SNA flavour of Connect:Direct is being used 
over Enterprise Extender and hence that the transport protocol is UDP. That 
possibility has already been explored ad nauseam!

-

Chris Mason

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Reply via email to